Was Tucker Carlson fired for Political Expedience?
- Thread starter utahorn
- Start date
Horn2RunAgain
2,500+ Posts
Murdoch is 92. It appears he doesn't really care about the future of fox. Some really odd decisions being made recently
OK, slow your roll a little. lol I looked to see what this judge said and in what context, and he did not do anything inappropriate. Both sides asked him to rule on competing motions for summary judgment. He did grant partial summary judgment in favor of Dominion on whether the statements were false (a ruling that is appealable). So yes, he said they were false, but that's part of his job. In fact, if you read Fox's argument in response in full, they don't actually argue that the statements at issue are true. They mainly argue that they aren't actionable. Not the same thing. (That's one of the reasons I wanted to see their answer. I googled it, and I'm not finding it.)
He didn't call them "liars," and he didn't poison the jury, because there was no jury to poison. In fact, he denied summary judgment on the issue of actual malice (meaning whether Fox knew the statements were false and were liars) and appropriately allowed that issue to go to the jury if the parties hadn't settled.
Can one reasonably argue that he should have denied summary judgment all the way around? Sure, but what he did wasn't inappropriate or unethical.
Perhaps I need to slow my roll but it still doesn't answer the question to why discovery was limited. Saying something is false without proper discovery is definitely the definition of a judge trying to make a certain outcome happen. Fox might have brought it upon themselves by not fighting but something can't be false when we have documentation that it is possible to have happened. In fact, AZ auditors say it did happen. The machines are vulnerable.
Last edited:
This is why I wanted to see the answer. Discovery isn't a fishing expedition. It's limited to evidence that's "reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Evidence that isn't relevant to the claims and defenses of the parties isn't going to be within the scope of discovery.
For example, I had a very attractive client who got in a car accident and hurt her back. She also had herpes sores on her butt crack. Both were discussed in her medical records. The defense was obviously allowed to get the records that pertained to her back injury, but I was allowed to redact the butt crack references, because she wasn't trying to blame them on the car wreck. (She did mention a late night partying at a bar in Temple after it was closed and hooking up with the owner, but nothing was confirmed.) In short, they weren't relevant to any claim or defense in the lawsuit.
Likewise, discovery regarding the machines wouldn't be relevant unless Fox was claiming that the statements at issue were true.
They did give the court the known Dominion problems that I showed you above so they were definitely pushing the angle that the machines were vulnerable. Dershowitz said Fox was denied a peak into the machines. The "lies" might be something Powell said beyond the machines.
Hmm. Maybe that's the chick who gave me the crabs.
Last edited:
Tucker was canned more for the fiasco with a producer than the Dominion suit.
True, but a lot of that came out because of the Dominion suit.
I think everyone would concede that the machines has problems at various times, but has more to do with why someone might believe something went wrong than the actual accuracy of the statements at issue. They were a lot more specific and nefarious. They had to do with intentional rigging of vote counts, votes being intentionally switched, foreign operators in Venezuela, etc.
She was very pretty and had a bit of an innocent look. I actually considered setting her up with a good friend of mine after her case settled. Then I saw her medical records. Lol.
Therein lies the problem. We know they can be hacked easily and votes can be changed. The MSM did a lot of these stories before the 2020 election before it somehow became an undoable conspiracy theory. Here are a few stories.
Hackers find voting machines used throughout the US are vulnerable to attack | CNN Politics
Democrats warned Dominion machines were switching votes before 2020.
Democratic senators warned of potential 'vote switching' by Dominion voting machines prior to 2020 election
I'm trying hard to find an article that I read a few years ago but I can't find it. It discussed that Dominion machines during the 2020 election tallied 3-4% more democrat votes over other machines not using Dominion software.
As I've always said they'll call you a conspiracy theorist for calling out election fraud but they'll fight like hell in court to keep you from looking inside. Powell tried to get into the machines but they wouldn't let her. They could humiliate her if they believe she's wrong but why won't they let her look?
Let's be honest here. This was a democrat judge in a blue state. Fox had no chance of getting a fair shake.
Last edited:
Facing Addiction
1,000+ Posts
I'll readily admit that the case would have gone differently if brought in Glasscock County District Court.
It's a sad thing to say that you just can't trust the judgment of a liberal judge. It wasn't that way just 10 years ago but now they are there to help the left in any capacity possible.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
